We have located links that may give you full text access.
A Census of Midsize to Large Supermarkets in Toronto: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of the Consumer Nutrition Environment.
OBJECTIVE: Assess the consumer nutrition environment in midsize to large supermarkets by supermarket type and area-level socioeconomic variables.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional census of 257 supermarkets using the Toronto Nutrition Environment Measures Survey in Stores.
SETTING: Toronto, Canada.
VARIABLES MEASURED: Availability; price and linear shelf space of fruits and vegetables vs energy-dense snack foods by supermarket type; after-tax, low-income measure; and neighborhood improvement area.
ANALYSIS: Multivariate linear regression.
RESULTS: There was a high availability of fruits (7.7 of 8) and vegetables (9.5 of 11). There was similar linear shelf space for fruits and vegetables vs energy-dense snack foods (ratio, 1.1 m). Adjusted fruit prices were lowest in quintiles 1 (β = -$1.30; P = .008), 2 (β = -$1.41; P = .005), and 3 (β = -$1.89; P < .001) vs quintile 5 (lowest percentage of people living with low income) and in ethnic (β = -$3.47; P < .001) and discount stores (β = -$5.64; P < .001) vs conventional. Adjusted vegetable prices were lowest in quintiles 2 (β = -$1.87; P = .04), 3 (β = -$1.78; P = .03), and 4 (β = -$2.65; P = .001) vs quintile 5 and in ethnic (β = -$7.10; P < .001) and discount (β = -$5.49; P < .001) stores. They were highest in other (β = + $3.08; P = .003) vs conventional stores. Adjusted soda and chips prices were lower in discount (β = -$1.16; P < .001) and higher in other stores (β = + $0.67; P < .001) vs conventional.
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Findings do not indicate inequities in shelf space, availability, or price across diverse neighborhoods. Practitioners can use findings to help consumers navigate supermarkets to make healthy choices.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional census of 257 supermarkets using the Toronto Nutrition Environment Measures Survey in Stores.
SETTING: Toronto, Canada.
VARIABLES MEASURED: Availability; price and linear shelf space of fruits and vegetables vs energy-dense snack foods by supermarket type; after-tax, low-income measure; and neighborhood improvement area.
ANALYSIS: Multivariate linear regression.
RESULTS: There was a high availability of fruits (7.7 of 8) and vegetables (9.5 of 11). There was similar linear shelf space for fruits and vegetables vs energy-dense snack foods (ratio, 1.1 m). Adjusted fruit prices were lowest in quintiles 1 (β = -$1.30; P = .008), 2 (β = -$1.41; P = .005), and 3 (β = -$1.89; P < .001) vs quintile 5 (lowest percentage of people living with low income) and in ethnic (β = -$3.47; P < .001) and discount stores (β = -$5.64; P < .001) vs conventional. Adjusted vegetable prices were lowest in quintiles 2 (β = -$1.87; P = .04), 3 (β = -$1.78; P = .03), and 4 (β = -$2.65; P = .001) vs quintile 5 and in ethnic (β = -$7.10; P < .001) and discount (β = -$5.49; P < .001) stores. They were highest in other (β = + $3.08; P = .003) vs conventional stores. Adjusted soda and chips prices were lower in discount (β = -$1.16; P < .001) and higher in other stores (β = + $0.67; P < .001) vs conventional.
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Findings do not indicate inequities in shelf space, availability, or price across diverse neighborhoods. Practitioners can use findings to help consumers navigate supermarkets to make healthy choices.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app